Seems to corroborate his own testimony of course but being able to see where the shooting happen, and how Trayvon could have walked up on him after it seems (according to Z) after he was walking away once told to do so by dispatch.

Olliedog

06-22-2012, 03:15 AM

I haven't decided either way on this but it seems rather implausible that in his heightened sense of awareness as he was pursuing TM that he could have missed him being in that wide open area between the buildings.

I also don't get how TM punched him and knocked him to the ground, hit him in the face up to a dozen times and then proceeded to bash his head in on the pavement. Yet the fight started on one path and then ended up down the next path even though TM overwhelmed him by knocking him to the ground and supposedly mounted him and commenced the pounding.

He also appears to be overwhelmed by having his head bashed in yet was able to feel his jacket lifting up and TM arm moving for the gun. All the while getting his head pounded into the concrete ( did TM just palm his bald head, like dribbling a basket ball, to have the arm free to reach for the gun?). I can't help to also wonder why his wounds don't show the severe a$$ kicking he supposedly encountered. Wouldn't the back of his head and his face be all bruised up? I would think the bruises would still be there if the band aids where.

Lastly, I have never been in an altercation that I couldn't have recalled with clarity what happened. GZ did not seem to be all that clear in how he recalls the situation. That may be normal but to me it seems like he is trying to remember what he had said previously as opposed to a detailed description of what actually happened. From what I understand he had at least a partial criminal justice education and wanted to be a cop. If true I would suspect he would be aware enough to keep his story straight no matter what. Telling the simple truth IMO would be easier to relay than his actions here would suggest.

Ken Bora

06-22-2012, 09:15 AM

So we all hunt here right?
Ever talk to a feller a few days after a deer hunt?
The story flows, it gushes.
As soon as Z got out of his vehicle and told 911 he was going, he was on the hunt.
Does his story flow? No.
From the start I thought, wannabe without proper training put himself into a situation he could not handle. Now the lying about the money, the wife and he phone stuff. As well as this newly released tape. He shoulda stayed in his car. So the dead kid weren’t an angel.
Did he need killin’?

HPL

06-22-2012, 09:29 AM

Lastly, I have never been in an altercation that I couldn't have recalled with clarity what happened. GZ did not seem to be all that clear in how he recalls the situation. That may be normal but to me it seems like he is trying to remember what he had said previously as opposed to a detailed description of what actually happened. From what I understand he had at least a partial criminal justice education and wanted to be a cop. If true I would suspect he would be aware enough to keep his story straight no matter what. Telling the simple truth IMO would be easier to relay than his actions here would suggest.

You're joking, right? I've never been in an altercation where I could remember blow for blow exactly how it went down. I remember breaking up a dog fight back when I was in college and in the process I got bitten, and my mother also got bitten. There were three dogs and although I know which one bit me, we never could figure out which one or ones bit my mom, or exactly when or how she got bitten. Things happen fast and are frequently confusing. I can only imagine what it would be like if 1. someone had first clocked me in the face hard enough to daze me (not to mention that a hard shot to the nose makes your eyes water affecting your vision and causing further confusion) and 2. then knocked me to the ground and began smacking my head against concrete. Personally, I thought Zimmerman sounded very credible, esp since he was probably still somewhat in shock after a fight in which he was getting the worst part until he actually killed the other guy (with all that entails, both psychologically and legally).

charly_t

06-22-2012, 01:08 PM

So we all hunt here right?
Ever talk to a feller a few days after a deer hunt?
The story flows, it gushes.
As soon as Z got out of his vehicle and told 911 he was going, he was on the hunt.
Does his story flow? No.
From the start I thought, wannabe without proper training put himself into a situation he could not handle. Now the lying about the money, the wife and he phone stuff. As well as this newly released tape. He shoulda stayed in his car. So the dead kid weren’t an angel.
Did he need killin’?

That's about how I saw it.

Olliedog

06-22-2012, 01:13 PM

You're joking, right? I've never been in an altercation where I could remember blow for blow exactly how it went down. I remember breaking up a dog fight back when I was in college and in the process I got bitten, and my mother also got bitten. There were three dogs and although I know which one bit me, we never could figure out which one or ones bit my mom, or exactly when or how she got bitten. Things happen fast and are frequently confusing. I can only imagine what it would be like if 1. someone had first clocked me in the face hard enough to daze me (not to mention that a hard shot to the nose makes your eyes water affecting your vision and causing further confusion) and 2. then knocked me to the ground and began smacking my head against concrete. Personally, I thought Zimmerman sounded very credible, esp since he was probably still somewhat in shock after a fight in which he was getting the worst part until he actually killed the other guy (with all that entails, both psychologically and legally).

No I am not joking but relating this to any fight I have been in. I also don't see how comparing a one on one situation to a three on one is a good comparison. If GZ had been jumped by three guys I would agree that the confusion would be understandable.

While I respect your view that he sounds credible, I wonder why you don't address the other issues I find to be inconsistent? How was TM hidden in that open area? How was it that he knew how many times he was hit, that he could feel through his jacket where the grass was, could feel his jacket come up, feel TM arm moving for the gun yet he doesn't know with clarity how it started on one path and ended up where it did? He undoubtedly is telling a story with a lot of details yet the details don't flow very well when he recalls what happened. Would someone so dazed and confused ( as you are suggesting) remember the finer points and not have a clear picture of the event? IMO those two things do not jive well together.FWIW I would buy it if he didn't have the finer details and said he didn't know because be was so dazed.

Daniel J Simoens

06-22-2012, 01:14 PM

So we all hunt here right?
Ever talk to a feller a few days after a deer hunt?
The story flows, it gushes.
As soon as Z got out of his vehicle and told 911 he was going, he was on the hunt.
Does his story flow? No.
From the start I thought, wannabe without proper training put himself into a situation he could not handle. Now the lying about the money, the wife and he phone stuff. As well as this newly released tape. He shoulda stayed in his car. So the dead kid weren’t an angel.
Did he need killin’?

I don't know, we are talking about killing another human being, not a deer. If I killed another man I'm pretty sure I'd slow down and make sure I got everything exactly right, especially when talking to the cops. You confuse one little detail and you'll burn for it in court.

Olliedog

06-22-2012, 01:21 PM

So we all hunt here right?
Ever talk to a feller a few days after a deer hunt?
The story flows, it gushes.
As soon as Z got out of his vehicle and told 911 he was going, he was on the hunt.
Does his story flow? No.
From the start I thought, wannabe without proper training put himself into a situation he could not handle. Now the lying about the money, the wife and he phone stuff. As well as this newly released tape. He shoulda stayed in his car. So the dead kid weren’t an angel.
Did he need killin’?

I can't say if this is true ( we weren't there )but we agree on the heightened state of awareness that he would have been in. TM wasn't anywhere as far as he could see yet he was somehow within 20ft or so standing in a wide open area. I can't help but to think he is using the same smarts in telling this "story" that he used when he discussed moving the money on the jail phone. What are the chances that those phones have signs that state that all conversations are recorded???? Even if they don't he knew enough to speak in codes as is apparent in the transcripts.

Olliedog

06-22-2012, 01:27 PM

I don't know, we are talking about killing another human being, not a deer. If I killed another man I'm pretty sure I'd slow down and make sure I got everything exactly right, especially when talking to the cops. You confuse one little detail and you'll burn for it in court.

Very true, but the truth tends to flow much more fluidly than a lie. Lies don't stick as vividly in our memory unless there is time to ingrain it. IMO he seems to be recalling what he said in his earlier statement to the Police and struggling to get it right as opposed to retelling a story that should be vivid in his mind. I may be totally wrong but I don't think so.

BonMallari

06-22-2012, 02:17 PM

am I the only one who want this whole subject to be resolved and go away...this case has been scrutinized as much as the OJ trial,enough already

gmhr1

06-22-2012, 02:26 PM

Bond hearing for Z next Friday the 29th

Byron Musick

06-22-2012, 02:37 PM

What is bad if you think about it a bit, is that the police should have arrested him the night of the shooting for his own protection, from himself. I doubt this video would be circulating (or even produced) if he had been read his rights vice having a feeling that his killing was considered, at the time, self defense.... If he had been arrested this may not have been such a news article. IMHO...

HPL

06-22-2012, 11:04 PM

No I am not joking but relating this to any fight I have been in. I also don't see how comparing a one on one situation to a three on one is a good comparison. If GZ had been jumped by three guys I would agree that the confusion would be understandable.

While I respect your view that he sounds credible, I wonder why you don't address the other issues I find to be inconsistent? How was TM hidden in that open area? How was it that he knew how many times he was hit, that he could feel through his jacket where the grass was, could feel his jacket come up, feel TM arm moving for the gun yet he doesn't know with clarity how it started on one path and ended up where it did? He undoubtedly is telling a story with a lot of details yet the details don't flow very well when he recalls what happened. Would someone so dazed and confused ( as you are suggesting) remember the finer points and not have a clear picture of the event? IMO those two things do not jive well together.FWIW I would buy it if he didn't have the finer details and said he didn't know because be was so dazed.

to begin with, you seem to be overlooking the fact that it was dark and raining. Darkness affects vision, as does rain, and rain also muffles sound. Very possible that Trayvon was able to sneak up on Zimmerman if he came from the right direction, and although it does look pretty wide open, we never got a 360 degree view of the area so we really don't know how close the sidewalk is to all the buildings, etc. It also looks to me like the videographer is using a bit of a wide angle lens which distorts perspective, exaggerating distances. If so, it would make the buildings look farther from the sidewalks than they actually are and making the area look more wide open than it actually is.

If I were in a similar situation, I hope I would be smart enough to consider my words to the cops as carefully as Zimmerman was. If you just ramble on, there is a good chance that there will be inconsistencies in your story from one telling to another and the cops will jump on things like that. I will also say that the guy winning the fight might be better able to remember the blow by blow better than the one getting the stuffing knocked out. I also wonder how YOUR memories would look if compared to a video of the events or if compared word for word with the other guy's account. If Zimmerman says that Trayvon hit him three times , I would figure that it might have been three, it might have been two, or it might have been six. I wouldn't expect him to tell me "well, first he hit me in the nose, then three times to the right side, followed by a left hook to the jaw, and then kicked me in the knee and then gave me a spinning hammerfist to the side of the head". If he did tell me that, I would not expect to see the same events in that order on the security tape. Just not the way most normal people react when in a fight.

Cody Covey

06-23-2012, 12:17 AM

What is bad if you think about it a bit, is that the police should have arrested him the night of the shooting for his own protection, from himself. I doubt this video would be circulating (or even produced) if he had been read his rights vice having a feeling that his killing was considered, at the time, self defense.... If he had been arrested this may not have been such a news article. IMHO...

He was...He was handcuffed, put in a car, taken down town and questioned at which point the police felt it was self-defense...what more do you want?

Olliedog

06-23-2012, 01:19 AM

to begin with, you seem to be overlooking the fact that it was dark and raining. Darkness affects vision, as does rain, and rain also muffles sound. Very possible that Trayvon was able to sneak up on Zimmerman if he came from the right direction, and although it does look pretty wide open, we never got a 360 degree view of the area so we really don't know how close the sidewalk is to all the buildings, etc. It also looks to me like the videographer is using a bit of a wide angle lens which distorts perspective, exaggerating distances. If so, it would make the buildings look farther from the sidewalks than they actually are and making the area look more wide open than it actually is.

If I were in a similar situation, I hope I would be smart enough to consider my words to the cops as carefully as Zimmerman was. If you just ramble on, there is a good chance that there will be inconsistencies in your story from one telling to another and the cops will jump on things like that. I will also say that the guy winning the fight might be better able to remember the blow by blow better than the one getting the stuffing knocked out. I also wonder how YOUR memories would look if compared to a video of the events or if compared word for word with the other guy's account. If Zimmerman says that Trayvon hit him three times , I would figure that it might have been three, it might have been two, or it might have been six. I wouldn't expect him to tell me "well, first he hit me in the nose, then three times to the right side, followed by a left hook to the jaw, and then kicked me in the knee and then gave me a spinning hammerfist to the side of the head". If he did tell me that, I would not expect to see the same events in that order on the security tape. Just not the way most normal people react when in a fight.

Here is the first half of the video and a link to his written statement when he was taken to the station that night.

In the video you can clearly see how open it is but he does say it was dark and although he had a flashlight, the batteries were dead. This would only lead me to ask why he would be in such darkness while looking for someone in light of the break ins and attacks that had happened recently ( he makes a point to include this in his written statement). Would a normal person do this?
If you recall the original 911 tapes I believe he tells the dispatcher that he is following him when they tell him not to. In the video he claims he isn't following him, but looking for an address ( having to go through a pitch black area to do so) and is jumped on his way back to his vehicle.In the video I linked he states he saw him duck between the rows of houses that are 70 - 100 ft away. Once again it seems inconsistent that he could see him in the darkness that far away yet was too dark to see him up close. He also says that he was punched in the nose and knocked on his back and then mounted. In the video he hits him and then somehow pushes him down. Two very different scenarios IMO. Would you have headed into any of this ( especially the darkness) after someone you think may be dangerous without drawing your weapon first? this story defies logic or any sense at all.

I encourage you to read the written statement and compare it to the original 911 transcripts and these video statements. Things don't jive well and his actions don't make sense from what folks would normally do given the scenario and motivation he gives( robberies and attacks).

Lastly, would a normal person, after having fired his gun, thinking( as he stated ) that he thought he had missed (when TM said "you got me") get on the persons back after holstering his gun???? A normal person that had just been " severely beaten" would hold that person at gunpoint after discharging it. It doesn't sound as if he was incapacitated in the least either to be able to instantly gain his composure and take control of a situation that TM was supposedly in control of. I don't think the courtroom is going to be a favorable experience for Mr Zimmerman.

Olliedog

06-23-2012, 01:23 AM

He was...He was handcuffed, put in a car, taken down town and questioned at which point the police felt it was self-defense...what more do you want?

I believe that you are over stating the Police thinking it was self defense. It seems to me that the interpretation of the vagaries of the law were the problem. Not that they deemed him innocent.

Byron Musick

06-23-2012, 08:21 AM

He was...He was handcuffed, put in a car, taken down town and questioned at which point the police felt it was self-defense...what more do you want?

That's not being formally charged or arrested. My point is he would not have made those stupid video's if he had followed his right to remain SILENT, vice being stupid... He would have been allowed to Lawyer up and all the stupid crap he and his wife did, would likely not have happened.

HPL

06-23-2012, 09:00 AM

Here is the first half of the video and a link to his written statement when he was taken to the station that night.

In the video you can clearly see how open it is but he does say it was dark and although he had a flashlight, the batteries were dead. This would only lead me to ask why he would be in such darkness while looking for someone in light of the break ins and attacks that had happened recently ( he makes a point to include this in his written statement). Would a normal person do this?
If you recall the original 911 tapes I believe he tells the dispatcher that he is following him when they tell him not to. In the video he claims he isn't following him, but looking for an address ( having to go through a pitch black area to do so) and is jumped on his way back to his vehicle.In the video I linked he states he saw him duck between the rows of houses that are 70 - 100 ft away. Once again it seems inconsistent that he could see him in the darkness that far away yet was too dark to see him up close. He also says that he was punched in the nose and knocked on his back and then mounted. In the video he hits him and then somehow pushes him down. Two very different scenarios IMO. Would you have headed into any of this ( especially the darkness) after someone you think may be dangerous without drawing your weapon first? this story defies logic or any sense at all.

I encourage you to read the written statement and compare it to the original 911 transcripts and these video statements. Things don't jive well and his actions don't make sense from what folks would normally do given the scenario and motivation he gives( robberies and attacks).

Lastly, would a normal person, after having fired his gun, thinking( as he stated ) that he thought he had missed (when TM said "you got me") get on the persons back after holstering his gun???? A normal person that had just been " severely beaten" would hold that person at gunpoint after discharging it. It doesn't sound as if he was incapacitated in the least either to be able to instantly gain his composure and take control of a situation that TM was supposedly in control of. I don't think the courtroom is going to be a favorable experience for Mr Zimmerman.

Actually, as far as being able to see Trayvon at a distance and then not seeing him as he was being jumped, many neighborhoods have pools of light surrounded by darkness actually making it more difficult to see in the pools of darkness. The dispatcher DID NOT ORDER him TO NOT follow Trayvon, simply suggesting that they didn't NEED him to do that. No, I would not have drawn my weapon before following Trayvon for at least three reasons, drawing immediately escalates a situation and makes it more likely that someone will get shot, Zimmerman knew the police were on the way (and running around with a drawn weapon on a dark and rainy night is a good way to get shot by the police (see reason #1)), and here in Texas, I believe that your right to carry (if you have a carry permit) is predicated on the weapon remaining concealed. My understanding of that part of our law is that the instant you draw the weapon, you are guilty of "brandishing".

As far as re-holstering the gun goes, I really don't want to have a drawn weapon when the cops show up if the threat appears to be over (again, see reason #1 above).

I would not expect all the statements to be exactly the same unless they were carefully rehearsed.

gmhr1

06-23-2012, 10:43 AM

Problem is common sense isn't very common these days . People try and put more into it, Just look at the evidence For George it doesn't matter if this trial is held in FL he will be locked up for a long time.

mngundog

06-23-2012, 11:13 AM

What is bad if you think about it a bit, is that the police should have arrested him the night of the shooting for his own protection, from himself. I doubt this video would be circulating (or even produced) if he had been read his rights vice having a feeling that his killing was considered, at the time, self defense.... If he had been arrested this may not have been such a news article. IMHO...

You are talking about his "Miranda warning" that's deals with questioning and is not required during an arrest. It is always read on TV shows, it is not required. In most situations you want to read it to a suspect, however there are some instances that another tactic is more appropriate.

HPL

06-23-2012, 11:39 AM

Problem is common sense isn't very common these days . People try and put more into it, Just look at the evidence For George it doesn't matter if this trial is held in FL he will be locked up for a long time.

Well, from everything I have read and heard, I sure hope you are wrong. So far, everything Zimmerman has said seems plausible to me and doubt is supposed to be on the side of the defendant. Perhaps a tragedy, but I just don't seen murder here myself.

paul young

06-23-2012, 02:11 PM

it's obvious that he needed killin'........

HPL

06-23-2012, 02:38 PM

it's obvious that he needed killin'........
don't think that's necessarily true, but as I said earlier, I find Zimmerman's rendition of events plausible and in our justice system, doubt is supposed to favor the accused.

Cody Covey

06-23-2012, 02:44 PM

That's not being formally charged or arrested. My point is he would not have made those stupid video's if he had followed his right to remain SILENT, vice being stupid... He would have been allowed to Lawyer up and all the stupid crap he and his wife did, would likely not have happened.

Thats exactly what an arrest is. He was forcibly detained and taken to the police station for further question. At which point he could've lawyered up. He chose not to at the time. All the other stupid crap he did was while under the advisement of a lawyer...I am not sure you have followed this case very closely...

Cody Covey

06-23-2012, 02:44 PM

I believe that you are over stating the Police thinking it was self defense. It seems to me that the interpretation of the vagaries of the law were the problem. Not that they deemed him innocent.
If the police didn't feel it was self-defense (the only time the law applies) then why was he released?

ARay11

06-23-2012, 03:59 PM

I'm sure theres someone here who can answer this...

Under FL law, does it matter who started it?

Obviously there was a skirmish, the coroner and the police all agree to that right?
So, self defense sounds reasonable for either combatant to claim.

I think what some people forget is not whether or not TM deserved to die. I think most can agree he did not.
Had GZ not been carrying a gun, he would have received his butt whoopin from an unruly teenager and they could have both gone home alive. But GZ chose to carry a gun. He chose to brandish that gun. And he chose to take a human life. None of that sounds "right", but if it's within the law, GZ should be a free man.

Olliedog

06-23-2012, 04:55 PM

I'm sure theres someone here who can answer this...

Under FL law, does it matter who started it?

Obviously there was a skirmish, the coroner and the police all agree to that right?
So, self defense sounds reasonable for either combatant to claim.

This is what I was going to ask next. Did TM fear for his safety? Was he defending himself from someone who was apparently stalking him? Right before the start of the fight GZ went for his phone which wasn't there. Wouldn't that be seen as means for going on the offensive? If he had shot GZ at that moment would it have been justified?

I can see a parallel here to someone trying to mug me that shoots me in the process of me kicking his a$$ while defending myself. Would the mugger have the gun/CCW community jumping to their side, sending money to a fund and saying I deserved killin????

HPL

06-23-2012, 07:19 PM

I'm sure theres someone here who can answer this...

Under FL law, does it matter who started it?

Obviously there was a skirmish, the coroner and the police all agree to that right?
So, self defense sounds reasonable for either combatant to claim.

I think what some people forget is not whether or not TM deserved to die. I think most can agree he did not.
Had GZ not been carrying a gun, he would have received his butt whoopin from an unruly teenager and they could have both gone home alive. But GZ chose to carry a gun. He chose to brandish that gun. And he chose to take a human life. None of that sounds "right", but if it's within the law, GZ should be a free man.

Perhaps had Zimmerman not been carrying his gun, Trayvon (a strong, fit 6'+ young man) would have continued to beat his head against the concrete until he caused permanent brain damage or even killed Zimmerman, so you can't assume that had Zimmerman hot been armed there wouldn't have been a killing that night. If Zimmerman is telling the truth, he did NOT "brandish" his weapon and in fact didn't draw it until he felt deadly force was required.

This is what I was going to ask next. Did TM fear for his safety? Was he defending himself from someone who was apparently stalking him? Right before the start of the fight GZ went for his phone which wasn't there. Wouldn't that be seen as means for going on the offensive? If he had shot GZ at that moment would it have been justified?

I can see a parallel here to someone trying to mug me that shoots me in the process of me kicking his a$$ while defending myself. Would the mugger have the gun/CCW community jumping to their side, sending money to a fund and saying I deserved killin????

Even if Trayvon felt that Zimmerman was "stalking" him, one might point out that Zimmerman had as much right to be walking on the sidewalk as Trayvon and if Zimmerman is telling the truth, Trayvon accosted him and initiated the actual physical conflict. I'm pretty sure that if you launch a "pre-emptive" assault against someone you "think" is going to mug you, before they pull a weapon or take some overt act, YOU will be guilty of assault. That is how Zimmerman is telling the story and so far I haven't heard or read anything to make me disbelieve him.

Olliedog

06-23-2012, 08:03 PM

Yes but GZ wasn't just walking down a sidewalk. If you include the statement that was given right after the incident from TMs girlfriend, he was aware that he was being followed and was going to ditch him. At that time the guy follows him into a area so dark that he couldn't be seen. Would you think it must just be some random dude innocently walking down the sidewalk that just seemed to be following you??????? Or would you think you needed to run or stand your ground??

How is it in your mind that TMs GFs statement isn't believable. If I remember correctly her statement came into play very early on. She states he yelled " why are you following me" and then the phone went dead. I believe that her testimony is highly relevant and once again doesn't jive with GZs story.

FWIW you stated earlier that you didn't believe it to murder. I would agree. Personally I believe the charges should be in the area of manslaughter. He didn't set out to kill anyone that night.

Ken Bora

06-23-2012, 10:46 PM

it's obvious that he needed killin'........

don't think that's necessarily true, but as I said earlier, I find Zimmerman's rendition of events plausible and in our justice system, doubt is supposed to favor the accused.
Silly me,
I thought the dead kid was the accused?
Z in his almighty power of neighborhood Dudley Doright
“Accused” him of being a shifty so and so and called
and followed and, well, went deer hunting. So some say
it was a good thing he had the gun as he was being thumpulated.
Well, if he had not had the gun… Do you think he would have
had the balls to go put himself in the position to get thumpulated?
Hmmmm?

HPL

06-23-2012, 11:42 PM

Silly me,
I thought the dead kid was the accused?
Z in his almighty power of neighborhood Dudley Doright
“Accused” him of being a shifty so and so and called
and followed and, well, went deer hunting. So some say
it was a good thing he had the gun as he was being thumpulated.
Well, if he had not had the gun… Do you think he would have
had the balls to go put himself in the position to get thumpulated?
Hmmmm?

Can't say, don't know that man. Funny thing here is that I would have thought that you would be one to say that the residents of a neighborhood need to stand up and take responsibility of watching out for their neighbors. I really wish someone had followed and reported whoever broke into one of my rentals that we were renovating and stole ALL my power tools that had taken me years to accumulate or perhaps whoever stole (over a period of about four years) three of my lawnmowers, or perhaps the folks who stole the ac condenser unit from one of my neighbors, or the guy who broke into one of my renters and stole all their hunting equipment (the renters were wildlife PHd students) and so on and so on. Perhaps Treyvon was perfectly innocent, but considering the illegal activity that had apparently been taking place in the neighborhood, I think it was quite reasonable for Zimmerman to be suspicious of Treyvon and was also reasonable of him to attempt to keep track of him while waiting for the POlice to show up. As Treyvon was apparently less than a block from his home when he decided instead to confront Zimmerman, I suspect that Treyvon actually initiated the altercation. Even Treyvon's girlfriend's story would seem to me to indicate that Zimmerman hadn't approached Treyvon and that it was actually Treyvon who doubled back and confronted Zimmerman.

I would also point out that Dudley Doright, although not smart, and a bit of a bumbler, was in fact, a straight arrow attempting to keep folks safe. You have always seemed like a law and order kind of guy to me by your posts and like the kind of person who would look out for his neighbors. Looks like I need to reassess that opinion.

Olliedog

06-24-2012, 12:05 AM

Following and reporting is the role of neighborhood watch and good neighbors. Putting yourself in a position that causes someones unnecessary death is completely different. Would you be thankful to your neighborhood watch if your kid was mistaken for a bad guy when waiting outside your rental and harmed or possibly killed all for the sake of protecting your stuff? Somehow I don't think you ( or anyone else)would applaud the efforts of any GZ if it was yours that died that night. I also find it impossible to believe that you would work as hard as you are here to put the blame solely on your kid as opposed to the nice neighbor who stalked them and then killed them when your son stood his ground. Unless of coarse your kid was wearing a hoodie.;-)

HPL

06-24-2012, 01:33 AM

No kids. Biology major. Know where the little buggers come from. :-)

Your example simply doesn't apply here. Zimmerman didn't approach, confront, or attack Trayvon. As opposed to hunting Trayvon,it was more like Zimmerman was trailing him. As Zimmerman tells it Trayvon closed the distance between himself and Zimmerman and then didn't just "confront" Zimmerman, he attacked him and was beating him, slamming his head against concrete!! Quite a bit of this is on Trayvon. Once HE brought this to a physical level, he became the aggressor and ended up paying the price, a very high one, I'll admit, but had he simply continued home instead of closing the distance between himself and Zimmerman and then attacking Zimmerman, he would be alive today happily selling pot to his classmates. Some of you seem to be overlooking the fact that if Treyvon had just walked the short distance to his father's house and gone in, Zimmerman would most likely have realized that he belonged in the neighborhood and gone on his way.

mjh345

06-24-2012, 02:02 AM

Can't say, don't know that man. Funny thing here is that I would have thought that you would be one to say that the residents of a neighborhood need to stand up and take responsibility of watching out for their neighbors. I really wish someone had followed and reported whoever broke into one of my rentals that we were renovating and stole ALL my power tools that had taken me years to accumulate or perhaps whoever stole (over a period of about four years) three of my lawnmowers, or perhaps the folks who stole the ac condenser unit from one of my neighbors, or the guy who broke into one of my renters and stole all their hunting equipment (the renters were wildlife PHd students) and so on and so on. Perhaps Treyvon was perfectly innocent, but considering the illegal activity that had apparently been taking place in the neighborhood, I think it was quite reasonable for Zimmerman to be suspicious of Treyvon and was also reasonable of him to attempt to keep track of him while waiting for the POlice to show up. As Treyvon was apparently less than a block from his home when he decided instead to confront Zimmerman, I suspect that Treyvon actually initiated the altercation. Even Treyvon's girlfriend's story would seem to me to indicate that Zimmerman hadn't approached Treyvon and that it was actually Treyvon who doubled back and confronted Zimmerman.

I would also point out that Dudley Doright, although not smart, and a bit of a bumbler, as in fact, a straight arrow attempting to keep folks safe. You have always seemed like a law and order kind of guy to me by your posts and like the kind of person who would look out for his neighbors. Looks like I need to reassess that opinion.

Ive been following these Trayvon Martin threads on POTUS and am shocked by many peoples take on this case. Its like coming up on a car wreck; you don't want to look; but your morbid curiosity gets the best of you.

Many of the frequent posters on these threads have done everything they can and jumped to conclusionsto support anything Zimmerman did rather than waiting for the facts.
HPL has made some value judgements on the case that he is pretty certain of. In spite of the fact that he obviously missed on his value judgements on Bora; he's obviously convinced he knows exactly what happened in Florida between TM and GZ.
HPL has even somehow decided that TM's girlfriends statements even support that TM was somehow the aggressor!!! I'd love to hear the logic behind that one.
Additionally HPL has gone so far as to call GZ a "straight arrow"!! Really, I mean REALLY!!! Have you seen this guys rap sheet? You have adifferent opinion of what is a straight arrow than I do. I generally don't classify people who have been charged with assalt on a LEO as a "Law & Order type" or a "Straight arrow" Particularily in light of the fact that in the instant case had he listened to the police, and stopped following this kid, when they told him that they didn't need him to be following this kid; then the whole incident may well have been avoided, and TM would still be alive.

I'm sorry that you have suffered property losses, many or most of us have
. I've just got to wonder why you bring that up. If you had had some wacked out neighborhood watch vigilante type kill a teenage kid eating skittles as he walked back to his dads house a block away would that somehow ameliorate your feelings on the loss of your tools?
Ever heard of INSURANCE???

Last but not least on the subject of "Law and Order" types; you and I obviously have different priorities on "Law & Order". If there were to be a couple of crime waves in my area one involving a rash of burglaries and the other involving vigilantes stalking and killing teenage boys eating candy and walking home to dads house, I'd be much more concerned with stopping the shooting of the teenagers. That would apply even if the teenagers were wearing hoodies and had gotten larger from their days as a 13 yr old football player up until their demise at the age of 17. My guess is that Mr Bora would agree with me on that

Olliedog

06-24-2012, 03:14 AM

"As opposed to hunting Trayvon,it was more like Zimmerman was trailing him."

So what you are saying is TM didn't have the right to stand his ground???? This makes sense to you how?? Why is the responsibility to retreat on the stalked as opposed to the stalker?? Your logic makes no sense to me.

HPL

06-24-2012, 03:46 PM

HPL has made some value judgements on the case that he is pretty certain of. In spite of the fact that he obviously missed on his value judgements on Bora; he's obviously convinced he knows exactly what happened in Florida between TM and GZ.
HPL has even somehow decided that TM's girlfriends statements even support that TM was somehow the aggressor!!! I'd love to hear the logic behind that one.
Additionally HPL has gone so far as to call GZ a "straight arrow"!! Really, I mean REALLY!!! Have you seen this guys rap sheet? You have adifferent opinion of what is a straight arrow than I do. I generally don't classify people who have been charged with assalt on a LEO as a "Law & Order type" or a "Straight arrow" Particularily in light of the fact that in the instant case had he listened to the police, and stopped following this kid, when they told him that they didn't need him to be following this kid; then the whole incident may well have been avoided, and TM would still be alive.

I'm sorry that you have suffered property losses, many or most of us have
. I've just got to wonder why you bring that up. If you had had some wacked out neighborhood watch vigilante type kill a teenage kid eating skittles as he walked back to his dads house a block away would that somehow ameliorate your feelings on the loss of your tools?
Ever heard of INSURANCE???

Last but not least on the subject of "Law and Order" types; you and I obviously have different priorities on "Law & Order". If there were to be a couple of crime waves in my area one involving a rash of burglaries and the other involving vigilantes stalking and killing teenage boys eating candy and walking home to dads house, I'd be much more concerned with stopping the shooting of the teenagers. That would apply even if the teenagers were wearing hoodies and had gotten larger from their days as a 13 yr old football player up until their demise at the age of 17. My guess is that Mr Bora would agree with me on that

Hardly know where to begin, so let me start here; Ken's statement really surprised because it has been my opinion that Ken is probably the type of fellow who, if he lived in a neighborhood that had been experiencing a series of break-ins and he spotted a suspicious looking fellow (day or night, rain or clear) would call the police AND then try to keep the person in view until the police arrived (actually, it's my suspicion that Ken would probably call the cops and then walk up, introduce himself, and attempt to find out why the person was there, but I could be wrong). So far, with the exception of actually confronting the guy, that's what Zimmerman says that he did, and that sounds to me like doing one's civic duty and being a good neighbor. I know that the popular thing these days, and maybe even the smart thing to do is to either just keep driving saying to yourself, "not my business", or call the cops and then drive on letting the gubment take care of you. Personally, I hope that my neighbors would choose to report and attempt to watch the situation until the police arrived (sounds a lot like what Zimmerman claims to have been doing). So that 's why I was a bit surprised at Ken's comment.

mjh345 needs to improve his/her reading skills. At no point did I say that Zimmerman was a strait arrow. What I said was that as I recall, Dudley Doright was a strait arrow, implying that it is a bit strange to hear the term "Dudley Doright" used as a pejorative in that context.

It seems to me that in part of Zimmerman's statement he said that he had in fact broken off trailing Trayvon and was on his way back to his truck when Trayvon basically jumped him, initiating the attack, so it seems likely to me that had Trayvon simply gone on home, instead of initiating a physical attack, he would still be alive.

Insurance? Ever heard of deductibles? Mine is based on the value of my house and so far, I haven't collected a penny as I am responsible for the first approx $1500.00 of any individual loss. Three, $350.00+ lawnmowers stolen one at a time, all out of my pocket. Approx $1200.00 worth of power tools, my pocket, etc.

As to Zimmerman being "some wacked out vigilante" who stalked some little, innocent kid just standing around minding his own business eating skittles, then finally shooting him down in cold blood, the evidence that has been published just doesn't support that. As Zimmerman tells it and as much of the available evidence seems to indicate, TRAYVON ATTACKED Zimmerman and then and only then did Zimmerman pull his firearm and shoot (and he only shot once, so, not out to kill Trayvon, just trying to keep Trayvon from killing him). As far as that goes, if one of my neighbors actually does shoot some 14 yearold breaking into their house, you can bet that I'll be at the head of the line to shake his hand.

"As opposed to hunting Trayvon,it was more like Zimmerman was trailing him."

So what you are saying is TM didn't have the right to stand his ground???? This makes sense to you how?? Why is the responsibility to retreat on the stalked as opposed to the stalker?? Your logic makes no sense to me.

You say stalking, I say keeping an eye on a suspicious character until police arrived. I think you misunderstand the concept of stand your ground. If I think someone is following me I have the right to ask them why, they don't have to answer, and I certainly don't have the right to initiate an assault on them. The instant I escalate to an assault, they have the right to "stand their ground". Zimmerman was breaking no laws by keeping an eye on Trayvon until the police arrived. Trayvon was breaking the law the instant he assaulted Zimmerman. If Zimmerman's account is correct and he had quit trailing Trayvon and started back to his truck to get his cellphone, then Trayvon REALLY had no reason at all to attack Zimmerman AND once Trayvon initiated an assault, THEN Zimmerman may have had the right to use deadly force. When I was in college we had a good friend who was a prosecutor and I can remember her saying that although there were times where you have justifiable homicide, there was no such thing as "justifiable assault". Trayvon made a terrible decision when he decided to attack Zimmerman. He paid a terrible price. He should have gone home instead of confronting Zimmerman who, it seems to me was within his rights to surveil someone he thought was acting suspiciously, especially since he had called the police and alerted them to the situation.

gmhr1

06-24-2012, 04:07 PM

Z did have a right to stand his ground he didn't do anything that tm had a right to assault him for. if tm felt hat he was being followed he should have called his family members that were less than seventy yards away and ask them to step out the door or better yet hang up on your girlfriend and call police . Having been robbed its not about insurance it's about being violated and it does make you more aware of strangers. The gated community he lived in had a lot of robberies committed by young black kids of course z would take notice of tm he was acting weird like he was on drugs. I don't know what that means but it will all come out at trial.

charly_t

06-24-2012, 04:30 PM

Wonder if TM thought Z was a robber. TIC

gmhr1

06-24-2012, 04:36 PM

well if he did he didnt hang up with his girlfriend and call the police. Wouldn't she have called 911 when she claims the phone went dead and she wasn't able to reach him again. Shouldn't she have called police or his family and said hey some creep is outside your door stalking your brother and now I can't reach him. Wouldn't you think someone in that house would have said tm went to get me a tea hours ago and hasn't come home yet. They didn't seem very worried about him or they didn't want the police involved.

Ken Bora

06-24-2012, 09:39 PM

Hardly know where to begin, so let me start here; Ken's statement really surprised because it has been my opinion that Ken is probably the type of fellow who, if he lived in a neighborhood that had been experiencing a series of break-ins and he spotted a suspicious looking fellow (day or night, rain or clear) would call the police AND then try to keep the person in view until the police arrived (actually, it's my suspicion that Ken would probably call the cops and then walk up, introduce himself, and attempt to find out why the person was there, but I could be wrong).

you nailed the bold underline, as for the 911 part. I aint never reported skittle eatin'
I get home after 9pm. I walk my dogs at night all the time. I even have a black hoodie.
I walk up to and chat with folk at night, in the dark, with my dogs.
And a valad what if.... what if dead child thought Z was a robber? Be nice to be able to ask him.
Z shoulda stayed in his car like the police told him.

HPL

06-24-2012, 11:24 PM

you nailed the bold underline, as for the 911 part. I aint never reported skittle eatin'
I get home after 9pm. I walk my dogs at night all the time. I even have a black hoodie.
I walk up to and chat with folk at night, in the dark, with my dogs.
And a valad what if.... what if dead child thought Z was a robber? Be nice to be able to ask him.
Z shoulda stayed in his car like the police told him.

I'm not saying that anyone involved here made the best decision, but the police didn't TELL him to stay in the car, and I know from experience that it frequently takes police too long to arrive to be able to point to the fellow you were calling about and say "there he is". Like one fellow said on a different forum when asked why he carried a gun, "because policemen are too heavy". I think that Zimmerman was trying to be a good citizen and neighbor and unfortunately for both men Trayvon made a fatal mistake when he attacked him.

One thing that I haven't read anywhere is at what distance Zimmerman was following Trayvon. If he was staying half a block or so behind him, that should have given Trayvon plenty of space to be able to get home without incident if he had just made the sensible choice.

As far as your what if, if Trayvon thought that Zimmerman was a robber, well, then, it was very foolish of him to confront him when home and safety were only a few yards away.

My sympathies began to swing to Zimmerman about the time our friends Jesse and Al began attempting to color the event as a racist act, and continued to swell as the media kept publishing the photo of 10 or 12 year old Trayvon instead of one showing him as he actually was (17, 6'+, and, at least at times somewhat thuggy looking). Made me feel like they were hiding something and began to sound like a lynch mob. Then there was the fact that that group was claiming that the "white man" was profiling and stalking some little black kid and then, in the words of one congresswoman, "shot him down like a dog" which is demonstrably NOT what happened. to top it off, when it turned out that Zimmerman is in fact part Hispanic, they actually went so far as to refer to him as a "white" Hispanic (whatever the hell THAT is). Would be laughable if it weren't so blatant.

So, get rid of all the hyperbole, and what I think it comes down to is; Zimmerman was aware that there had been a series of break-ins in his neighborhood. Zimmerman saw someone acting in what he felt was a suspicious manner. Zimmerman called the police to report the activity and then decided to attempt to keep an eye on the person until police arrived. Zimmerman did NOT attempt to "apprehend" or in any other way molest Trayvon. Zimmerman did not go "hunting" for Trayvon with blood in his heart and gun drawn. Trayvon noticed Zimmerman watching and following him. Instead of proceeding to the safety of his father's house or calling the police to tell them that HE had seen someone behaving suspiciously, Trayvon decided to not only confront Zimmerman but to actually assault him. Trayvon then did attack Zimmerman, striking him in the face, knocking him to the ground and then beating his head on the concrete sidewalk. Zimmerman then pulled his legally carried firearm, discharging it ONE TIME which apparently cooled Trayvon's jets causing him to break off the attack and unfortunately resulting in Treyvon's death.

From what I have read, that seems a plausible scenario, and it would be my position that in that case, Trayvon's death, though unfortunate, was not a crime.

Olliedog

06-25-2012, 12:45 AM

While I think this conversation has reached it's end I would like to say that I appreciate the way it was conducted. Thank you gent's.

gmhr1

06-25-2012, 10:13 AM

I think best we can hope for is a hung jury.

mjh345

06-28-2012, 02:47 AM

I think best we can hope for is a hung jury.
Cyndi, I would guess that you have made far more posts on the Trayvon Martin threads than anyone else. It is my observation that you either have some inside knowledge of the facts of the case that the rest of us don't have, or that you have ZERO objectivity on the case and have made a "Rush to Judgement"

Have you acquired some insider info from your Arizona location that makes you sure of his wrongful arrest?
If so you probably should share that with the cops and prosecutors in Florida who have investigated the on scene evidence & facts of the case and based on their on the scene investigation arrested him and criminally charged him.

If you are not privy to any such exculpatory evidence, then why would you say "The best WE can hope for is a hung jury"?
Why do you use the term "WE" in your statement? Is your last name Zimmerman: or do you have some type of personal relationship with him?
Or is that "WE" just a final definitive indicator of your complete lack of objectivity in this case?

I would think that as a law abiding citizen of the USA the best "WE" could hope for is that there is not a hung jury, and instead the evidence comes out in a clear and convincing manner so that he is acquited if he did nothing wrong, or he is convicted if he shot Mr Martin dead without legal justification
.

HPL

06-28-2012, 06:37 AM

Cyndi, I would guess that you have made far more posts on the Trayvon Martin threads than anyone else. It is my observation that you either have some inside knowledge of the facts of the case that the rest of us don't have, or that you have ZERO objectivity on the case and have made a "Rush to Judgement"

Have you acquired some insider info from your Arizona location that makes you sure of his wrongful arrest?
If so you probably should share that with the cops and prosecutors in Florida who have investigated the on scene evidence & facts of the case and based on their on the scene investigation arrested him and criminally charged him.

If you are not privy to any such exculpatory evidence, then why would you say "The best WE can hope for is a hung jury"?
Why do you use the term "WE" in your statement? Is your last name Zimmerman: or do you have some type of personal relationship with him?
Or is that "WE" just a final definitive indicator of your complete lack of objectivity in this case?

I would think that as a law abiding citizen of the USA the best "WE" could hope for is that there is not a hung jury, and instead the evidence comes out in a clear and convincing manner so that he is acquited if he did nothing wrong, or he is convicted if he shot Mr Martin dead without legal justification
.

I would certainly agree that a hung jury is probably not the most desirable outcome, but I for one have my doubts as to the reason that Zimmerman was arrested and indicted. Everything that I have seen and read leads me to believe that the arrest and indictment were POLITICALLY motivated and probably had little to do with the actual evidence. He wasn't charged or arrested until the media had splashed Treyvon's baby photo all over the airwaves making it look like Zimmerman had slaughtered an innocent practically with mother's milk still on his lips, and Jesse and Al got involved, clearly distorting the facts and essentially creating a lynch mob mentality to which the local authorities had to bend. Of course we aren't privy to all the evidence, but when the folks making the accusation go to such trouble to color the facts, it makes me very skeptical of their claims and the "prosecution" begins to look more like "persecution".

With all the political pressure that was brought to bear by people whose motives are always in question, the prosecution has a tough row to hoe to convince me that the shooting wasn't justified, tragic perhaps, but still legally justified.

mjh345

06-28-2012, 07:32 AM

I would certainly agree that a hung jury is probably not the most desirable outcome, but I for one have my doubts as to the reason that Zimmerman was arrested and indicted. Everything that I have seen and read leads me to believe that the arrest and indictment were POLITICALLY motivated and probably had little to do with the actual evidence. He wasn't charged or arrested until the media had splashed Treyvon's baby photo all over the airwaves making it look like Zimmerman had slaughtered an innocent practically with mother's milk still on his lips, and Jesse and Al got involved, clearly distorting the facts and essentially creating a lynch mob mentality to which the local authorities had to bend. Of course we aren't privy to all the evidence, but when the folks making the accusation go to such trouble to color the facts, it makes me very skeptical of their claims and the "prosecution" begins to look more like "persecution".

With all the political pressure that was brought to bear by people whose motives are always in question, the prosecution has a tough row to hoe to convince me that the shooting wasn't justified, tragic perhaps, but still legally justified.

AMAZING!!
I thought it was really weird that one could divine the probative value of evidence that they had never seen or heard from Arizona; but apparently one can pick up those those vibes on the Coastal bend of Texas also.
Cyndi appears to have been greatly swayed by the fact that the dead boy wore a hoodie, and had grown some between his 13th and 17th birthdays. She has cited that "evidence"" numerous times
You were also apparently swayed by the fact this kid also was larger as a 17 yr old than as a 13 yr old. What else were you influenced by in making your judgement?

Please share, because I've gotta believe it must be overwhelming "evidence"; since you "Law & Order" types usually have a tendency to support the police and prosecution.

I'm certain you two beacons of Justice & Law & Order aren't accepting everything Zimmerman says as fact in light of the fact that he has plenty of motivation to skew the facts, and that the authorities who have dealt with the case say there are inconsistencies in his version of the story. Additionally with his past police record, and the fact that he and his wife have been charged with lying since this incident, his credibility is questionable at best.

I gotta believe that you two "Law & Order types would agree that with his record, and the fact he shot & killed the only witness who could belie his version of the story, that it would be a very bad precedent to set to simply accept his version of the story.

So once again tell me please what it is that you two have been able to divine from 1000's of miles away that convinces you that he is being railroaded by the Fla authorities

.

paul young

06-28-2012, 08:50 AM

I would certainly agree that a hung jury is probably not the most desirable outcome, but I for one have my doubts as to the reason that Zimmerman was arrested and indicted. Everything that I have seen and read leads me to believe that the arrest and indictment were POLITICALLY motivated and probably had little to do with the actual evidence. He wasn't charged or arrested until the media had splashed Treyvon's baby photo all over the airwaves making it look like Zimmerman had slaughtered an innocent practically with mother's milk still on his lips, and Jesse and Al got involved, clearly distorting the facts and essentially creating a lynch mob mentality to which the local authorities had to bend. Of course we aren't privy to all the evidence, but when the folks making the accusation go to such trouble to color the facts, it makes me very skeptical of their claims and the "prosecution" begins to look more like "persecution".

With all the political pressure that was brought to bear by people whose motives are always in question, the prosecution has a tough row to hoe to convince me that the shooting wasn't justified, tragic perhaps, but still legally justified.

As you know, they don't have to convince you. IF you were in the jurist pool and you answered the questions asked truthfully during the voir dire process, i'm sure you would be excused from jury duty on this trial, as would I.-Paul

huntinman

06-28-2012, 09:12 AM

If they can find people with just Common sense it will help thats something we didnt see in the OJ or Casey Anthony case.

Common sense is not so common...

paul young

06-28-2012, 12:14 PM

I'm really happy that most of you dont live in the real world where people are kicking in your front door and your neighbors daily or where your 14 yr old son has to run upstairs and get his dads gun to shot the 37 yr old guy that just kicked in his front door. Or the Church group that is having a home meeting when the people come through their back door and shoot 3 of them, or you go to work leaving your 13 year old daughter home when someone bangs on her door than kicks it in and she has to run for her life. If you live that daily you would understand what Z was thinking maybe you would be suspicious.

You're the one that needs to get real; the kid was walking down the street.

you think the type of crime you refererenced only happens in Arizona? if you do, you are either naiive or don't keep up with the news nationwide. -Paul

Dustin D

07-13-2012, 10:03 PM

FBI cleared Z of any racial profiling. Z is asking for a new judge fearing he can't get a fair trial because of remarks this Judge made during the hearing.

Which is what always catches these judges with their tongue out. He'll get a new judge easily.

Ken Bora

07-14-2012, 07:18 AM

FBI cleared Z of any racial profiling.......

phew, what a relief! ! ! !

............... I want to tell you a story. I'm going to ask you all to close your eyes while I tell you the story. I want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to yourselves. Go ahead. Close your eyes, please. This is a story about a little girl walking home from the grocery store one sunny afternoon. I want you to picture this little girl. Suddenly a truck races up. Two men jump out and grab her. They drag her into a nearby field and they tie her up and they rip her clothes from her body. Now they climb on. First one, then the other, raping her, shattering everything innocent and pure with a vicious thrust in a fog of drunken breath and sweat. And when they're done, after they've killed her tiny womb, murdered any chance for her to have children, to have life beyond her own, they decide to use her for target practice. They start throwing full beer cans at her. They throw them so hard that it tears the flesh all the way to her bones. Then they urinate on her. Now comes the hanging. They have a rope. They tie a noose. Imagine the noose going tight around her neck and with a sudden blinding jerk she's pulled into the air and her feet and legs go kicking. They don't find the ground. The hanging branch isn't strong enough. It snaps and she falls back to the earth. So they pick her up, throw her in the back of the truck and drive out to Foggy Creek Bridge. Pitch her over the edge. And she drops some thirty feet down to the creek bottom below. Can you see her? Her raped, beaten, broken body soaked in their urine, soaked in their semen, soaked in her blood, left to die. Can you see her? I want you to picture that little girl. Now imagine she's white. :(

Matt McKenzie

07-14-2012, 09:06 AM

Is that a quote from "A Time to Kill"?

Ken Bora

07-14-2012, 09:16 AM

Is that a quote from "A Time to Kill"?

...it is ...

HPL

07-14-2012, 10:16 AM

phew, what a relief! ! ! !

............... I want to tell you a story. I'm going to ask you all to close your eyes while I tell you the story. I want you to listen to me. I want you to listen to yourselves. Go ahead. Close your eyes, please. This is a story about a little girl walking home from the grocery store one sunny afternoon. I want you to picture this little girl. Suddenly a truck races up. Two men jump out and grab her. They drag her into a nearby field and they tie her up and they rip her clothes from her body. Now they climb on. First one, then the other, raping her, shattering everything innocent and pure with a vicious thrust in a fog of drunken breath and sweat. And when they're done, after they've killed her tiny womb, murdered any chance for her to have children, to have life beyond her own, they decide to use her for target practice. They start throwing full beer cans at her. They throw them so hard that it tears the flesh all the way to her bones. Then they urinate on her. Now comes the hanging. They have a rope. They tie a noose. Imagine the noose going tight around her neck and with a sudden blinding jerk she's pulled into the air and her feet and legs go kicking. They don't find the ground. The hanging branch isn't strong enough. It snaps and she falls back to the earth. So they pick her up, throw her in the back of the truck and drive out to Foggy Creek Bridge. Pitch her over the edge. And she drops some thirty feet down to the creek bottom below. Can you see her? Her raped, beaten, broken body soaked in their urine, soaked in their semen, soaked in her blood, left to die. Can you see her? I want you to picture that little girl. Now imagine she's white. :(

And your point would be?

charly_t

07-19-2012, 01:12 PM

Now Z says it was "God's plan". Why do people blame God for things ? Each of us is born a free moral agent. We make our own choices. And the gun became "the gun, not his gun" etc.

Ken Bora

07-19-2012, 10:10 PM

Now Z says it was "God's plan". Why do people blame God for things ? Each of us is born a free moral agent. We make our own choices. And the gun became "the gun, not his gun" etc.

X2!!!
I am kinda miffed when folk do that as well.
Free Choice!
it's in that pesky Old Test. someplace I think.
Ya know, the one every one skips over for the action packed New Test.?;)

BonMallari

07-20-2012, 06:49 AM

what in the world was his attorney thinking in letting him do the interview on Hannity's program, just going to give the DA something to question him on...His attorney was even in the room, he has nothing to gain by going on TV, except to maybe narrow the jury pool...

charly_t

07-20-2012, 01:46 PM

what in the world was his attorney thinking in letting him do the interview on Hannity's program, just going to give the DA something to question him on...His attorney was even in the room, he has nothing to gain by going on TV, except to maybe narrow the jury pool...

I think his attorney is either dumb as a box of rocks or has a brain flaw. Maybe he is brilliant and I just can't see it. Maybe he is going to say Z can't get a fair trial because of all the media stuff. Of course lots of people are feeling sorry for Z and this may help them raise more money. Money is very important !

Last but not least ( just my thought of course and we all know how I get in trouble for reading things into something ): Z is enjoying his "fame". If he wasn't afraid of getting hurt you would see more of this behavior from Z.